The more I watch Washington work, the more I am convinced that it doesn’t. This problem is not an invention of the 24-hour news cycle, talk radio, and the blogosphere; it’s systemic. Our two-party system thrives on partisan bickering and celebrates political intransigence . . .
It seems that now more so than ever moderates have no political home. The obvious way to deal with this is to create a new third party, a purely centrist party. The problem is that there is no base for a purely centrist party. If such a base did exist, one which backed spending cuts, tax hikes, and an environmental policy that is both green and economic, we’d have a President Bloomberg or President Huntsman. There is no centrist base in America . . .
Essentially, I would split each party in two. For the Republican Party, this would be as simple as establishing a separate Tea Party, most likely lead by Jim DeMint or Mike Lee –sorry, still no room for Ron Paul. It also shouldn’t be too difficult to separate the Democratic Party. Just give Sherrod Brown a chance to unite with Berry Sanders and the Blue Dogs an opportunity to break free.
Not only do voting bases exist for these two new parties, but so do activists, donor lists, organizations, and elected officials. This means no lag time between the creation of the two new parties and the day they become competitive.
A four party system will also facilitate compromise in ways that a three party system cannot. . . .
However, it’s very possible that in a four party system, the center right and center left parties could together control half of the seats in Congress. A compromise between these two parties –and the politicians in these parties wouldn’t be afraid to compromise because they’re, well, reasonable- would produce pragmatic policy, driven by practicality rather than ideology.Read the whole thing.
We must also have electoral reform. If all four parties are competitive than virtually every presidential election will go to the House. Even worse, for state and local elections, tactical voting will ensue. And why is tactical voting such a bad thing? Americans should feel free to vote their conscience and not feel constrained by strategic political concerns . . . .